The Four: A Survey of the Gospels

Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom

From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John

Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture

Jane Austen
(A Biography)

Solomon Among the Postmoderns

The Baptized Body

1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary

The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter

A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons

Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature

Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen

The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism

A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel

Against Christianity

From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution

Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy

Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper

A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament

Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature

Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays

Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life

The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church

« Previous Post | Next Post »
« Previous post in category | Next post in category »

Theology: Arian Predestination

In a 1976 issue of the Scottish Journal of Theology, F. Stuart Clarke examines Athanasius’ doctrine of predestination, and ends with the comment that Athanasius would have rejected the predestination doctrines of Augustine, Aquinas, Luther and Calvin “as being, in principle, Arian, because they do not recognise the full Godhead of the Son in election, but ascribe election to what Calvin calls a ‘secret counsel’ (arcanum consilium) of God, a will of which Christ is the agent but not the foundation; not present, as Professor J. K. S. Reid says, when ‘God frames his purpose to elect.’  There is a parallel between this and the Arian doctrine of the person of Christ.”  He suggests that Athanasius would have seen the continuity between the Westminster doctrine of the decree and the Arian views of the person of Christ that arose in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.  He doesn’t find mind to choose from in the tradition: “The Augustinian doctrine of predestination is, in principle, Arian; the Cassianite doctrine avoids Arianism only at the cost of ceasing to be a doctrine of predestination.”

Clarke’s account of the Reformed tradition is hardly fair; as Richard Muller has shown (Christ and the Decree), the Reformed tradition has always affirmed that election is “in Christ.”  Yet, Clarke may be right to wonder if, when the doctrine gets translated into preaching and popular teaching, that in Christ gets communicated just as strongly as the sovereignty of God’s will.  Popular Reformed theology could certainly take a cue from Athanasius, who declares that Christ the eternal Son is the “living will” of the Father, and as such His Advent is the advent of the decree, God’s choice, in human flesh.